Jumping to conclusions

There are reports that it might have been Muslim extremists that were behind the London bombings. This is pretty speculative so far. Let’s recap the evidence:

1) The bombings were on trains and buses.

2) Muslim extremists invented the art of blowing up public transportation.

3) There are strong indications that at least one of the bombings was achieved by a suicide bomber.

4) Muslim extremists invented the tactic of the suicide bomber.

5) England has a very high level of Muslim extremists.

6) Muslim extremists have a long history of threatening terrorist attacks against England.

7) After examining evidence from the bombings, police conducted rather forceful raids on at least one home in a predominantly Muslim community.

8) The trend in England has been that once a neighborhood reaches a certain point of Muslim occupation, it passes a “tipping point” and very soon becomes almost exclusively Muslim.

9) While the IRA has a long history of conducting terrorist attacks in England in general and London in particular, a) they have eschewed directly targeting civilians; b) they immediately claim credit for their work; c) they often phone in warnings just before the bombs go off; d) they’ve never coordinated attacks before; e) they’re currently facing a horrendous PR crisis of their own; and f) they’ve been pretty much inactive for years. So the odds of this being an IRA bombing are pretty slim.

10) The Muslim community of Great Britain had their Stock Response #1 ready at the time of the bombing: “It was terrible, and don’t blame us.”

11) Shortly thereafter, they trotted out Stock Response #2: “Considering the awful things that Great Britain is doing in Iraq, and what Israel is doing with British support, it’s no great surprise that such things happen.”

12) This was followed by Stock Response #3: “We fear a wave of reprisals against Muslims, and demand protection.”

So let’s not jump to any hasty conclusions here, people. I’ve had my eye on this group of Buddhists over there for some time, and suspected them of having Guy Fawkes sympathies…

The Japanese invented suicide bombers, but other than that you are right.

pennyJuly 12, 2005

More likely the Samoan Liberation Front.

joeJuly 12, 2005

The Tamil Tigers invented the strap-on exploding belt, I think.

PeterJuly 12, 2005

I hear the Artic Polar Front is using similar tactics against the residents of Nome, AK. On a polar bear sympathetic web site, they issued the following statement:

“Infidels of Alaska, it’s terrible that you lost four of your ‘paper tiger’ seal hunters in an unfortunate ice hole ‘accident’, but don’t blame us. It was the artic foxes that did it. We saw them push your ‘paper tigers’ in, biting them repeatedly on the ankles. Considering the EPA protections you give them, it’s no wonder it’s coming back to haunt you. But unless you stop hunting for seals in our fishing holes, the foxes will continue their heinous acts. But just remember, it’s never us. It can’t be. After all, we’re white, fuzzy, cute and peaceful. Just ask any of our friends, like George Soros, David Corn and Ted Rall.”
Signed, APF.

13) A little thing like Muslim extremists claiming credit on their website.

Captain DaveJuly 12, 2005

I always thought this sort of thing was the work of the Missouri Women’s Auxilury. They have a long standing history if mass-transit hatred. I once saw one take out a church bus with a rocket launcher. I guess they’ve stepped up thier European operations…

DavidJuly 12, 2005

Personally I am very suspicious of the Sihk in the Kwicky Mart.

By the by Hashishans regularly did suicide attacks, this is much earlier than the Japanese.

Eneils BaileyJuly 12, 2005

Karl Rove did it.

DZJuly 12, 2005

Hmm. Why do you call the responses from the muslim community “Stock Responses”, when a) your own responses to events such as this one could be called exactly that too, and b) if muslims didn’t respond (denounce the attacks), you would deride them for not doing so (which would be justified). Seems like they can’t win.

Also, it’s a bit tendentious to call these 12 points of yours “the evidence.” I mean, take number 5 for example: “England has a very high level of Muslim extremists.” Is this “evidence” that muslim extremists blew up these trains/buses?

I’m not saying it wasn’t muslim extremists. It probably was. I’m just saying this post is very unconvincing.

PeterJuly 12, 2005

Dave writes:

“Why do you call the responses from the muslim community “Stock Responses”…”

Because they are. Please see the CAIR manual.

“Seems like they can’t win.”

Nope, they can’t. Not until they start turning over the murderous thugs who commit these atrocities and begin ostrasizing the emans and mullahs espousing anti-Western and anti-Semitic hatred and violence.

As for…”the evidence” for the attacks? Gee, golly, I could’ve sworn the “Secret Organisation Group of al-Qaeda of Jihad Organisation in Europe” claimed responsibility. Doubtful there are many Buddhists, Christians and Jews in THAT organization.

Moving forward.

PeterJuly 12, 2005

Crud. That was meant for DZ.

DZJuly 12, 2005

Peter: I’m unaware of a CAIR “manual,” but answering my question with a simple “because they are,” is rather pointless.

Saying “they” (the average muslim, the muslim community, whatever you want to call it) have to “turn over the murderous thugs” implies that they actually know these terrorists. I’m not so sure that they do. Most muslims want nothing to do with that scum. They’re just regular, ordinary people like you and me, not involved in any way with (that kind of) crime. As for a tougher stance on the imams that incite hatred and violence, yes, I’m all for that (cf. Abu Hamza in London).

The evidence thing: like I said, the perpetrators of the London attacks probably were muslim extremists, I was and am not questioning that. I was questioning the tendentious nature of JT’s “list of evidence.”

“Saying “they” (the average muslim, the muslim community, whatever you want to call it) have to “turn over the murderous thugs” implies that they actually know these terrorists. I’m not so sure that they do. Most muslims want nothing to do with that scum. They’re just regular, ordinary people like you and me, not involved in any way with (that kind of) crime.“

“Saying “they” (the average right-winger, the right-wing community, whatever you want to call it) have to “turn over the murderous thugs” implies that they actually know these terrorists. I’m not so sure that they do. Most right-wingers want nothing to do with that scum. They’re just regular, ordinary people like you and me, not involved in any way with (that kind of) crime.”

We shall remember these words.

AnonymousDrivelJuly 12, 2005

RE: Peter’s post (July 12, 2005 03:54 PM)

Ha!

Link to the “polar bear sympathetic web site”, please. I want to express my outrage at their callous indifference and smirking retorts, not to mention their supplying of earthen dens for the howling masses.

– Dizzy – moonbats are never convinced of anything until they have their own heads cut off…. then of course its a little too late….. Maybe the only way you’d stop pavaricating for these gutless people is if you were sitting on the tram that day and heard the Muslim Jadist scunbag scream “Allah Akbar” just before he set off the bomb…. Get a clue dude….

edJuly 13, 2005

Hmmmm.

“We shall remember these words.”

I’m sure your post was meant to be something very witty and rather pithy, but it frankly doesn’t make much sense to me at all.

Is there a roadmap available for that post or is there someone willing to interpret?

I believe the gentleperson was implying that those of us on the right are all prospective Tim McVeighs, and that we have a history of offering excuses for such attacks along the lines of the “yes, but”s we hear from the Muslim communities after an attack.

edJuly 13, 2005

Hmmm.

That’s possible. But I’ve never seen anything that would indicate that McVeigh was a conservative. On the other hand you’ve got all those domestic lefty terror groups from the 60’s and the current crop of eco-terrorists running around.

So CAIR had it’s PR firm and it’s “manual” cranked up and ready to go. The letter appeared in other papers, too. (Sorry, I didn’t bookmark them for your convenience.) All the same, this qualifies as a “stock response”.

If you believe the evidence is tendentious, you are correct. I believe the author was paraphrasing/mimicking the stock responses, which, over time, have proven to hold a great deal of accuracy. Maybe the wording is slightly off, but the sentiment is pretty spot on.

So CAIR had it’s PR firm and it’s “manual” cranked up and ready to go. The letter appeared in other papers, too. (Sorry, I didn’t bookmark them for your convenience.) All the same, this qualifies as a “stock response”.

If you believe the evidence is tendentious, you are correct. I believe the author was paraphrasing/mimicking the stock responses, which, over time, have proven to hold a great deal of accuracy. Maybe the wording is slightly off, but the sentiment is pretty spot on.

Nope, they can’t. Not until they start turning over the murderous thugs who commit these atrocities and begin ostrasizing the emans and mullahs espousing anti-Western and anti-Semitic hatred and violence.